Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Republic of Korea; Department of Cancer AI & Digital Health, National Cancer Center Graduate School of Cancer Science and Policy, Ilsandong-gu, Goyang, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea.
Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Republic of Korea.
Pain Physician. 2022 Oct;25(7):E931-E939.
Although several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported the efficacy of scrambler therapy (ST) for the management of chronic pain, those findings remain inconsistent.
This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the efficacy of ST for the management of chronic pain.
A meta-analysis of RCTs.
We searched core databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library for RCTs in October 2021. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for pain reduction were calculated using a random-effects model meta-analysis.
Out of 348 studies, a total of 7 RCTs (n = 287 patients) that met the inclusion criteria were included in the final analysis. Overall, ST marginally decreased pain scores after the end of the treatment compared with the control group, with substantial heterogeneity (SMD, -0.85; 95% CI, -1.66 to -0.03; I2 = 89.5%, n = 7). A subgroup meta-analysis found that the use of ST significantly reduced analgesic consumption compared to the control group (SMD, -0.54; 95% CI, -0.93 to -0.14; I2 = 0.0%; n = 2). However, no significant efficacy was observed in the subgroup meta-analyses by methodological quality, type of diseases causing pain, and follow-up period.
The included trials have a small sample size and low methodological quality.
ST seems to be effective in the management of patients with chronic pain. However, further, large RCTs are warranted to confirm our findings.
尽管几项随机对照试验（RCT）已经报道了 scrambler 疗法（ST）治疗慢性疼痛的疗效，但这些结果仍然不一致。
本荟萃分析旨在研究 ST 治疗慢性疼痛的疗效。
RCT 的荟萃分析。
我们于 2021 年 10 月在 PubMed、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 图书馆等核心数据库中搜索 RCT。使用随机效应模型荟萃分析计算疼痛减轻的标准化均数差（SMD）及其 95%置信区间（CI）。
在 348 项研究中，共有 7 项 RCT（n = 287 名患者）符合纳入标准，最终纳入了分析。总体而言，与对照组相比，ST 在治疗结束后略微降低了疼痛评分，但存在很大的异质性（SMD，-0.85；95%CI，-1.66 至 -0.03；I2 = 89.5%，n = 7）。亚组荟萃分析发现，与对照组相比，ST 显著减少了镇痛药物的消耗（SMD，-0.54；95%CI，-0.93 至 -0.14；I2 = 0.0%；n = 2）。然而，在亚组荟萃分析中，根据方法学质量、引起疼痛的疾病类型和随访时间，均未观察到显著的疗效。
纳入的试验样本量小，方法学质量低。
ST 似乎对慢性疼痛患者的治疗有效。然而，需要进一步的大样本 RCT 来证实我们的发现。
